Where do RAF pilots come from now?

[beamer]

I was asked a question of the other day about the source of RAF pilots and being of a certain age, I had to say I had no idea !

The gist of the query was where non-fast jet pilots actually emanated from. When I was going through, the RAF was of a size that those that fell by the fast jet wayside were, having reached an acceptable stage of training, offered the opportunity to go multi-engine or rotary. Obviously the Service was a lot bigger in those days, Cranwell, Linton and Fenton for the JP as an example and of course there were far more helicopter and multi-engine types in the inventory. Now, we have a much smaller Service and if reports are to be believed, the intake of what we used to call GD/P recruits are far fewer on the ground notwithstanding that it seems to take an inordinate length of time to actually reach a fast-jet squadron. So, to summarise, are there enough ‘drop-outs’ from fast jet training to provide the necessary numbers of new pilots for the multi/rotary fleets or maybe pilots stay longer in role with less incentive to rush off and join the airlines at the first opportunity.

Sorry if that’s all a bit long winded but answers on the proverbial postcard would be appreciated.

[alfred_the_great]

Perhaps instead of the other fleets being crewed by FJ drop outs, they’re crewed by people who want to be there?

[NutLoose]

I knew a young lad that was accepted in but never took it up after his date was deferred, He wanted to fly transports and stated that all along, I tried to tell him he needed to say FJ as that it what the RAF wanted and would then stream those that didn’t make the grade onto transport or rotary, but he was adamant and stuck to his guns with Transport and was accepted.

[rattman]

Perhaps instead of the other fleets being crewed by FJ drop outs, they’re crewed by people who want to be there?

Back in the day (70's) (when my uncle went through the RAAF) they put new pilots into fast jets then after a few years flying them and not killing themselves they would move them into transport role

Now from what I have been told they are selected at flight school based on temperament and personality either to go fast jet or transport/support.

[megan]

Friend went to Oz recruiting wanting to join the Army and fly helicopters. Recruiter told him the RAAF have helicopters, why not join them. He declined on the basis that they may place him onto some other type. We'll guarantee you fly helicopters in the RAAF if that's what you want. So he did, after a combat tour he was posted to the last Sabre course, when they were disposed of went to Mirage.

Other RAAF chaps I know who went to helos off course went to C-130, one of whom flew the first RAAF C-130 to Antarctica and the other the last C-130 out of Saigon.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

The whole "surely you want to fly jets" thing was widespread when I joined, but largely disappeared during Afghanistan, with (according to some EFT QFI friends) more folks wanting rotary than jet.

[NutLoose]

We had a guy on one of my Squadrons had a music degree and was a qualified teacher of music, he wanted to join as a musician, RAF told him there were no vacancies, but if you join as an armourer you will be able to change trades once in.... Result, a very pissed off armourer several years later, as you could not drop trade groups, only go up. It happens to all trades apparently.

[John Eacott]

With such thread drift my tale is another along these lines.

When I was interviewed for the RAF the question was inevitably asked, 'if we give you a pilot selection, what would you want to fly'. When I naturally answered helicopters the panel just about fell off their chairs, no-one in 1967 wanted to be a helicopter driver!

I did explain how much better it was than running up and down runways to get airborne, but they used my eyesight as an excuse to offer me a ground job anyway. Fortunately by an enormous set of coincidences I discovered the RN accepted helicopter pilots with 6/18 eyesight and got into Dartmouth that way. Two weeks after joining I was shown a DCI upping the eyesight standard for rotary wing drivers; they closed the loophole after my medical highlighted it. The Surgeon Commander had never heard of it before and had been rejecting applicants accordingly!

[melmothtw]

The whole "surely you want to fly jets" thing was widespread when I joined, but largely disappeared during Afghanistan, with (according to some EFT QFI friends) more folks wanting rotary than jet.

At the height of Afghanistan in about 2009/2010 I visited Odiham, and was told by the then Chinook Force Commander, Gp Capt Turner, that 80% of student pilots at Cranwell were requesting the Chinook.

[Bob Viking]

It would appear there is a familiar theme developing. It seems many Air Forces struggle from with same problem. Location.

It is never considered by those in charge but it plays a huge factor in the recruitment of a generation that are far better informed than their predecessors. I include my generation in that before anyone things I’m slinging mud unnecessarily.

In Canada very few students wanted to go FJs when I was there. They didn’t want a life in Cold Lake or Bagotville. Omani students don’t all want a life in Thumrait or Adam. And now Brit students seemingly don’t want a life of Norfolk, Lincolnshire or Northern Scotland. Such things can be a tough sell. And being moved around just exacerbates the problem.

​​​​​​​Let’s also remember that FJ flying is not screaming around at low level and dropping old school bombs any more.

Aside from whatever reasons may be cited, what else does Chinook have that other fleets don’t? Odiham. Stability at one base and close to the hub that is London.

Youngsters nowadays face a real struggle to ever put down roots and get on the housing ladder. 10-20 years in the military just doesn’t seem like the solution that it once did. Especially since the housing offer and additional benefits have been eroded so significantly.

When I came out of training I’d have gladly gone wherever I was sent. And then bought a house. If I were coming out of training now the choice of location would come above the choice of aircraft. A sad reality for many.

BV

[Krystal n chips]

At the height of Afghanistan in about 2009/2010 I visited Odiham, and was told by the then Chinook Force Commander, Gp Capt Turner, that 80% of student pilots at Cranwell were requesting the Chinook.

They weren't alone.

When the RAF realised they were short of engineers, again !, and the AMM recruitment drive expanded, many had the aspiration to become a Chinook crewman, and many applied for Odiham as their first choice posting.

Odiham actually had a policy of treating their AMM''s very well, not just tyre kickers like the FJ world, because they wanted them back when they became techs.

This policy worked .

[Herod]

With such thread drift my tale is another along these lines.

When I was interviewed for the RAF the question was inevitably asked, 'if we give you a pilot selection, what would you want to fly'. When I naturally answered helicopters the panel just about fell off their chairs, no-one in 1967 wanted to be a helicopter driver!

I did explain how much better it was than running up and down runways to get airborne, but they used my eyesight as an excuse to offer me a ground job anyway. Fortunately by an enormous set of coincidences I discovered the RN accepted helicopter pilots with 6/18 eyesight and got into Dartmouth that way. Two weeks after joining I was shown a DCI upping the eyesight standard for rotary wing drivers; they closed the loophole after my medical highlighted it. The Surgeon Commander had never heard of it before and had been rejecting applicants accordingly!

1967 and not wanting to be rotary?? Back then I was flying the Wessex in Aden, and enjoying the "licenced hooliganism"

[beamer]

Thanks for the replies chaps but no-one has actually answered the question……yet. Of course it was all different in ‘our day’ but what of now - is it still FJ until the system decides otherwise and how far into the training system do you have to go before multi or rotary becomes an option ?

[Nil_Drift]

It's a bit telling that so much change has happened so quickly that nobody has yet supplied the answer. The most recent factual information that I knew before retiring is summarised in this link.

https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles/45-squadron-complete-training-with-no-3-flying-training-school/

This was three years ago. L3 Harris stopped providing training and everything, to my knowledge, went to Ascent, as stated in Wiki with other references. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ascent_Flight_Training

Whenever MFTS was mentioned [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Military_Flying_Training_System ] people were still going apoplectic and spitting feathers.

[BEagle]

The role of a typical Advanced Flying School 70 years ago:The Training Task at Merryfield

The student pilot arriving at Merryfield has already completed comprehensive flying courses in Chipmunk or Prentice, and Harvard or Balliol aircraft; some may have flown the Lockheed Silver Star jet trainer as well. He may have been given this training in Canada or the United Kingdom, but in either case, he has been awarded his “Wings” and a commission. His commission may be for four or eight years, or he may be a National Service Officer nearing the end of his two-year period; in a few cases he will be a graduate from the Royal Air Force College, Cranwell, serving as a Permanently Commissioned Officer.

It is the task of this station to train these officers to fly Vampire aircraft, and for most it will be their first experience of “jets”. By the end of their course here they must reach near perfection in pure flying because at the next stage of training - the Operational Conversion Unit - they will learn to fly their aircraft as a weapon of war. Preoccupation with aiming and firing guns, and dropping bombs, means that accurate flying in any weather must be instinctive.

This aim is achieved at Merryfield by particular concentration on flying on instruments and in formation - the tactical battle deployment of the fighter aircraft. It goes without saying that to achieve the standard required (and this standard is continually being raised) the student pilot must bring undivided concentration to bear on his work. The Hunters, Swifts and Sabres which he will shortly be flying, are too precious and too exacting to be entrusted to any but the very best pilots.

The Vampire we use as a trainer here to-day, was the front line aircraft of yesterday. And so it will be in their turn with the super-priority fighters just coming into service; the last word of to-day is the common-place of the near future. Such is the inexorable rapidity of aircraft development. The machines exact more of the pilots; the pilots must be trained to meet the demands. That is the task at Merryfield.

As for helicopters, during a particularly stressful day at RAF Brawdy early in my Hunter course, our jovial flight commander joked whilst making a cup of coffee in the crewroom "Of course if this is all a bit too much for you, you can always ask to go to helicopters!". Two of my colleagues took him at his word and the next thing we knew they were off the station to start their new courses.....

.....as navigator students!

[RetiredBA/BY]

The role of a typical Advanced Flying School 70 years ago:

As for helicopters, during a particularly stressful day at RAF Brawdy early in my Hunter course, our jovial flight commander joked whilst making a cup of coffee in the crewroom "Of course if this is all a bit too much for you, you can always ask to go to helicopters!". Two of my colleagues took him at his word and the next thing we knew they were off the station to start their new courses.....

.....as navigator students!
and what has that got to do with the original question ?

[Timelord]

Thanks for the replies chaps but no-one has actually answered the question……yet. Of course it was all different in ‘our day’ but what of now - is it still FJ until the system decides otherwise and how far into the training system do you have to go before multi or rotary becomes an option ?

Students are streamed after EFT (Tutors / Prefects). Preferences can be expressed but of course, “The needs of the service are paramount” . Once streamed every course failure will be dealt with on its merits with re streaming being one option. After a tour or so in any role a change is possible but rare and, of course, “The needs of the service………”

[OvertHawk]

and what has that got to do with the original question ?

Very little but It strongly suggests that his "jovial flight commander" was a bit of a £*&!

[alfred_the_great]

Students are streamed after EFT (Tutors / Prefects). Preferences can be expressed but of course, “The needs of the service are paramount” . Once streamed every course failure will be dealt with on its merits with re streaming being one option. After a tour or so in any role a change is possible but rare and, of course, “The needs of the service………”

and if the needs of the service require an entire course to go multi off they go.

it’s no longer everyone start as FJ and chop for job security and send them to multi.

[Sky Sports]

I have a friend at work who is an ex-RAF rotary pilot. At the end of his EFT, the whole course, (12 students) had their streaming board, and most wanted FJ naturally. They all had high hopes as they had attained high CBAT scores and got very good reports from EFT.

The briefing before the streaming board started was a bit of a shock. "There are no FJ training slots currently available, so before you go in front of the board, decide now if you want to bid for multi-engine or rotary?"

He was incredibly p!ssed off to find out that on the EFT course that followed, FJ needed 8 of the 10 students, and multi took the other 2. He also knew for a fact that of the 8 that were streamed FJ all but one had worse CBAT scores than he did!

It really is pot luck what you end up flying nowadays, and the best pilots don't necessarily end up flying FJ.

[Herod]

It really is pot luck what you end up flying nowadays, and the best pilots don't necessarily end up flying FJ.

Of course not. The BEST pilots fly rotary, and the SECOND BEST fly multi. :ok:

[Bob Viking]

This is an honest question. What the hell do CBATs have to do with where you get streamed?

To this day I have no idea how I did in my CBATs and have never seen any reference to them in any report I had from when I joined the RAF.

CBATs are surely just an indicator for whether or not an individual has the potential aptitude to make it as a pilot. I may be wrong, but I would be very surprised if anyone ever looks at CBATs when they stream people at the end of EFT. It will be done on flying performance on that course. Maybe an EFT QFI could convince me otherwise.

BV

[downsizer]

BV - quite. CBAT scores are seen by the OASC and recruiters but no other relevance. I think candidates could ask for the ascore but once passed it's a meaningless number.

On topic - lets not forget how much flying training needed to failed to end up on TacAT here people! ;)

[trim it out]

I have a friend at work who is an ex-RAF rotary pilot. At the end of his EFT, the whole course, (12 students) had their streaming board, and most wanted FJ naturally. They all had high hopes as they had attained high CBAT scores and got very good reports from EFT.

The briefing before the streaming board started was a bit of a shock. "There are no FJ training slots currently available, so before you go in front of the board, decide now if you want to bid for multi-engine or rotary?"

He was incredibly p!ssed off to find out that on the EFT course that followed, FJ needed 8 of the 10 students, and multi took the other 2. He also knew for a fact that of the 8 that were streamed FJ all but one had worse CBAT scores than he did!

It really is pot luck what you end up flying nowadays, and the best pilots don't necessarily end up flying FJ.
One of the amusing bits about the pilot course was the ice breakers on day 1 of EFT groundschool and every RAF student standing up, regaling us of tales of derring do on the UAS and IOT and how much they wanted to drive a Tornado.

Fast forward 6 months and the same people stood up in the front of the classroom in Shawbury telling us all how much they had wanted to be a Chinook pilot since before they could talk.

[Mogwi]

It really is pot luck what you end up flying nowadays, and the best pilots don't necessarily end up flying FJ.

Of course not. The BEST pilots fly rotary, and the SECOND BEST fly multi. :ok:

Actually, the BEST pilots fly all three!! (And two of them in the same conflict) 😊

Mog

[Flipster130]

This is a perennial problem.
I seem to recall seeing a document at UAS HQ ( along time ago) that was produced to consider the usefulness of UASs, university cadetships and the recruiting of ex VR UAS studes (who had taken CBAT). It also looked at UAS reports and BFT docs over a 10 year period. This was in the day when OASC candidates had to have exceptionally high CBAT scores to be considered for GDP.
The report said that (as intimated above) CBT scores only 'indicated the potential of a candidate to pass BFT' (JP/Tucano in those days). IIRC the report quoted that the OASC CBAT score cut-off equated to a 60% chance of passing out from BFT. Not a bad filter.
However, the report also claimed that a candidate from the UAS VR pool who was assessed as High Average or better (CBAT or not - there were some from earlier days) stood an 80% chance of getting to a front-line sqn cockpit (it might even have been a FJ sqn). So, UASs were thought to be an even better indicator than aptitude testing alone and this was why the UASs system had a stay of execution in the late 1990s/2000s.

Nice tho' that was, I had a number of students who were high/above average but didn't get the required CBAT score at OASC and were either offered GDN, ground branch, or nowt. Often, these guys and girls were as good as (if not better in some cases) than those who were on cadetships. The latter were generally top-drawer too but they had the CBAT scores and a lot did very well. But it seemed daft to me that good people (who were well motivated and could actually fly properly) were not utilised. It was claimed at the time by some people at OASC that UASs were biased and their reports could not be trusted and it was galling to learn that the assessments of professional UAS QFIs (often vastly experienced) were often discounted in favour of CBAT alone. I believe this changed slightly after the general dissatisfaction of the QFIs and COs filtered up (and whose assessments were then taken as the 'gospel truth' once streaming was done on based on our reports!).

From our UAS alone around that time - most who joined ended up on FJs and QWIs/QFIs themselves and 4 studes (all VRs initially) even ended up on the Reds (long gone from there before the current hiatus). Other studes of ours (cadetship types too) have been Sqn Cdrs, Flt Cdrs, QWIs QFIs, IREs and TPs - even some of Air Rank. Almost all of those whom we sent to OASC (not all went) and didn't get the required aptitude scores have excelled too - airline training capts and CEOs of big businesses. Other UASs of that era will have a similar story of success and believe that system was the jewel in the crown of fg trg system. Bottom line - CBAT is fine as a first filter but back then, the UAS flying training system was a far better indicator, while the QFIs were professional instructors who knew better than any computer game the potential of a student pilot. Sadly, it seems we can't afford that anymore. That is not to say that the present streamlined system doesn't work; it certainly seems to from the guys and girls I meet around the bazaars. Today's fg trg system appears to get more out of everyone and very few of those who get good initial results are discarded. Back then, there were more of us and you were always 'only 3 trips from the chop and the bus home', which happened quite often - probably too often. So that is notable progress - today's best are still the best.

[Sky Sports]

To this day I have no idea how I did in my CBATs and have never seen any reference to them in any report I had from when I joined the RAF.

BV
For a number of years now, everyone who has done CBAT walks away with a computer printout of their scores, so they know were they stand with regard to their application. Current cut-off score for pilot is 113, but 130 is generally considered 'competitive'.

What the hell do CBATs have to do with where you get streamed?
I have been told this by two people who have been streamed in the last couple of years. When streaming, the board have your EFT reports and CBAT scores to hand. CBAT does show your potential to be a pilot, but it also shows to what degree you can multi-task in a high pressure environment. The higher the score, the more likely you are to be able to operate in a stressful situation.
​​​​​​​It's the same reason they look at CBAT scores when drawing candidates from the sift.

[sycamore]

Can someone explain `CBT /CBAT` scores ,for someone from the `good `ol days`,..please...?

[Toadstool]

Can someone explain `CBT /CBAT` scores ,for someone from the `good `ol days`,..please...?

Computer Based Aptitude Tests.

[Sky Sports]

The following is taken from another site -

Computer Based Aptitude Tests (CBAT):
This is a full day sitting in front of a computer screen being given many, many tests. It’s exactly what it says on the tin, a test of YOUR aptitude. It’s not something you can easily practice for or revise for. Although, there are some things online you can do to help you get ready beforehand. But it’s designed to be something that tests you and your capability to take on board, process and react to different information, usually in multiple ways at the same time. Everyone is different and not everyone does well or passes it. Its basically a barrage of 'computer games' that you sit at Cranwell at the start of the application process for aircrew and certain other roles such as intelligence. It tests your capacity for -

Strategic Task Management
Visual and auditory perception
Short term memory and capacity
Spatial Reasoning
Symbolic Reasoning
Psychomotor Ability
Central Information Processing

It basically establishes how your brain is wired, what it is best at, and to what capacity.

At the end of the day, you are given a computer print-out of your scores for ALL the roles that require a CBAT score. The different tests listed above are 'weighted' for different roles, and although you have only sat one set of tests, your scores from those tests will be different for the different roles. You can then compare your score against the cut-off for all the roles. This allows you to change the role you have applied for if your brain is better suited to another job.

For example; if the cut-off for pilot is 112 and you scored 120, you have the aptitude to continue with your application but the margin (8) isn't great and you would do well to be picked from the sift.
On the other hand, if you scored 148 for Intelligence Officer when the cut-off is 95, (margin 53), then your brain is much more suited for this kind of work and you might want to consider changing your preferred role!

If you have two pilots sat in front of you, one with a CBAT score of 130 and another with a CBAT of 168, this instantly shows you who has the capacity to operate at the higher level.

[sycamore]

Thanks a lot ,T/S and S-S......such `fun` it is nowadays.....

[ShyTorque]

Can someone explain `CBT /CBAT` scores ,for someone from the `good `ol days`,..please...?

I was going to ask the same….. in my time at Biggin Hill OASC the aptitude tests consisted of contraptions such as winding a wooden wheel operating a contact with a time delay across a rotating drum covered in a pattern of metal dots. The more dots correctly “driven” over, the better the score.

Another test was watching a cascading row of symbols on a projection screen at the front of the room and pressing piano like keys that matched them as they fell. The rate of the falling symbols increased over time. More like a recruiting test for budding musicians. I’m sure I was rubbish at that one.

I was initially offered GD(N), which I declined. Having discounted my chances, I went off to study engineering instead. The following year I unexpectedly received a letter offering me a direct entry commission as a GD(P).

[The B Word]

CBAT is only used as an indicator of your likely success in the early stages of flying training - for Pilots that is ground school and Elementary Flying Training (EFT), and for WSO/WSOp that is for ground school and the foundation stages of training. CBAT is one of a few things that they look at for OASC - the others are the interview (just shy of 30 mins), the hangar exercises, the group discussions and the medical.

Streaming for Pilots takes place after EFT and they look at their training folders, their preferences and where the Service needs them to go. That Service need is always the biggest driver as to their destiny. As a sausage machine that keeps flowing, they have to dispose each set of trainees at each streaming board and it is not possible to keep parking folks capable of going to their preference because something might come up next time around. If you did that you would end up with a right mess…

[NutLoose]

Funny thing when I completed my training and we all put down our preferred choice of postings, there was only two of us that chose Odiham , one was a Irish lad who had visions of being able to go home from Aldergrove and myself, I was the only one that got it.

Those days Odiham was seen as a retirement halfway house full of old codgers awaiting their release date, the accommodation hadn’t faired well and still bore the faded wartime camouflage on the brickwork. Such was the shortage of buildings they had to convert the morgue into a laundrette as prior to that it was wash your clothes in a sink etc.

the nearest town of any interest for a young lad to spend their money, and I say that while biting my tongue was Basingstoke, a place so dire and bereft of entertainment that it made Aldershot look good.

As for the female species at Odiham, until the arrival of my mate on Chinooks and his wife who served in SHQ, I seem to remember a single WRAF Officer.

The proximity from London had both its advantages and disadvantages, one being whenever going on leave you invariably ended up hauling your bags across London between stations.

[Herod]

Way back, before Pontius had even gone to Biggin Hill, basic training from Day One was pure jet. (JP3 and 4). As I understood it at the time, the failure rate was considered too high and too expensive. 1968 or thereabouts, a short (12 hours?) course on the Chipmunk was introduced. The aim being to weed out those who could pass all the stuff at Biggin, but couldn't fly an aeroplane. Luckily I went the all-jet route, not flying a Chippy until over nine years after "wings".

Oh, and I doff my hat to you Mogwi.

[Yellow Sun]

Way back, before Pontius had even gone to Biggin Hill, basic training from Day One was pure jet. (JP3 and 4). As I understood it at the time, the failure rate was considered too high and too expensive. 1968 or thereabouts, a short (12 hours?) course on the Chipmunk was introduced. The aim being to weed out those who could pass all the stuff at Biggin, but couldn't fly an aeroplane.

You are on the right track Herod, there was a project to reduce wastage at the later stages of flying training. It started around 1973 with a survey of BFTS instructors to establish an objective assessment system. Hand in hand with this was the introduction of the Systems Approach To Flying Training (SAFT) at BFTS. Another component was the establishment of a Grading School trial at Church Fenton. The trial comprised 15 hrs (iirc) flying on the Chipmunk delivered in a standard fashion and objectively assessed. I don’t believe that any candidates were suspended, but their further progress was monitored. I believe it proved to be quite a good predictor. However, it also showed that you could only see so far ahead and whilst the predictions held pretty good at the next stage of training after that they fell away. Why the trial was not continued after the initial period I do not know, although I believe that a Chipmunk lead in was reintroduced a few years later.

The 1970s were a tumultuous period in Training Command, changeover from cadet to graduate entry, large fluctuations in year on year pilot recruitment and the shutdown of the multi-engine stream. I felt especially sorry for one of my students who was caught up in the latter event. He had worked very hard to get through the course and at the end it was coming good. He wouldn’t have made it through Valley but I had no doubt that he would have been successful at Oakington and gone on to make a success of whatever came after that. He was awarded his “wings” and then they were snatched away from him. As it happened, he went on to reach air rank in the Engineering Branch, so I suppose it didn’t turn out too bad for him.

An interesting thing I heard years later from a friend who had access to most of the relevant data for the period was that in spite of the strict application of objectivity in assessment, the most consistent factor in predicting success at the next stage of training was an experienced instructor at the present stage.

YS

[Gordomac]

Matching up "Needs of the Service" (constant variable) and Selection Performance (can become pretty steady) can become impossible.

I too went through OASC Biggin. They had a pre-selection assessment for those still at school with no 'O' levels. The prospect was to tell you whether or not you would likely,or not, succeed in the full selection programme. I failed. What they didn't tell you is that no further application was permitted until a period of two years expired. Penalty, wrongly applied to to an indicator assessment.

Up I went two years later but for Cranwell when it was the Acadamy for General List. Through part 1, I asked how I had done in the aptitude section and was told "Yes for pilot, no for Nav".

I was successful but offered Nav ! I declined.

I won a National Promotional Scheme for free PPL. Told the RAF and they asked me to write in again once I got my PPL. Did that and was offered Direct Entry Commission, pilot. But, Type C gone gone type B meant Service to 38 with option to terminate after 8 or 12 years.

Got me haircut, tried to get fit, listened to retired Sqd Leader up the road, practiced making my bed with hospital corners. Ready. MOD wrote and said Type B was cancelled and it would be for type A. -No termination option-. I declined and remained a Loader at LGW and started to build hours.

Civil College of Air Training, for BOAC/BEA had the same problems with matching. Never got it right and the whole system was binned years later.

Lastly, what on earth was the "Creamer" programme all about ? Pass OASC, Pass EFT and, was it there that one was so talented that you were "creamed" to become an Instructor yourself with, about 100 hrs total under your belt.

Tough call matching requirement with applicants as I discovered as a Selector in the Civil world.

[ShyTorque]

Yellow Sun,

I underwent BFTS at Linton on Ouse in 1977. By then the EFTS Chipmunk phase was gone and all basic training was carried out on the JP3 and 5. A Chipmunk EFTS reappeared at Swinderby some years later and in 1991 a mini EFTS was opened at Topcliffe, using the Bulldog, working alongside RAF Bulldog Standards and RN EFTS, to cater for a backlog on the Chipmunk course. Ever changing times.

[spekesoftly]

I completed some 30 hours flying training on the Chipmunk at PFS (Primary Flying Squadron) at Church Fenton in early 1969, prior to training on the JP3 and 4 at 1FTS Linton-on-Ouse, 1969 to 1970.

[charliegolf]

Yellow Sun,

A Chipmunk EFTS reappeared at Swinderby some years later

The Chippies were at Swinditz in August 79 when I was square bashing; so pretty soon after your time at Linton Shy. (Does that mean you broke the system?)

CG

[ShyTorque]

The Chippies were at Swinditz in August 79 when I was square bashing; so pretty soon after your time at Linton Shy. (Does that mean you broke the system?)

CG

Probably - they sent me off to instruct on the Bulldog EFTS at Topcliffe as a punishment! :{

[SimonPaddo]

Funny thing when I completed my training and we all put down our preferred choice of postings, there was only two of us that chose Odiham , one was a Irish lad who had visions of being able to go home from Aldergrove and myself, I was the only one that got it.

Those days Odiham was seen as a retirement halfway house full of old codgers awaiting their release date, the accommodation hadn’t faired well and still bore the faded wartime camouflage on the brickwork. Such was the shortage of buildings they had to convert the morgue into a laundrette as prior to that it was wash your clothes in a sink etc.

the nearest town of any interest for a young lad to spend their money, and I say that while biting my tongue was Basingstoke, a place so dire and bereft of entertainment that it made Aldershot look good.

As for the female species at Odiham, until the arrival of my mate on Chinooks and his wife who served in SHQ, I seem to remember a single WRAF Officer.

The proximity from London had both its advantages and disadvantages, one being whenever going on leave you invariably ended up hauling your bags across London between stations.

What! You mean Amazingstoke is worse than Aldersh1t? Its a close run contest though having seen both first hand.

[Yellow Sun]

Lastly, what on earth was the "Creamer" programme all about ? Pass OASC, Pass EFT and, was it there that one was so talented that you were "creamed" to become an Instructor yourself with, about 100 hrs total under your belt.


Gordomac,

I won’t try and defend the policy, primarily because I am unsure what its underlying purpose was; but I will defend those who found themselves caught up in it. First of all, they had quite a bit more flying experience than you suggest. Probably 30 hours Primary Training on the Chipmunk, 150 hours on the Jet Provost, ~100 hours Gnat or Varsity followed by about the same at CFS. Add a few more trips with Standards when they arrived at their first unit and they probably had just shy of 400 hours before coming into contact with their first student. Their flying had been intensive and covered a very wide spread of activity and they had demonstrated that they had better than average ability and usually displayed a greater degree of maturity than some of their peers.

None of those I encountered were volunteers, they would all have rather been doing something else, however they all got on with the job and did it well. In fact, I would go so far as to say that some were probably better at imparting knowledge and technique than a few of the ex DFGA Hunter mates that were around. I’m sure we’ve all met one! Thinking back to the creamies I encountered, almost without exception they went on greater things, either professionally or in career terms. I recall a young Fg Off John Thorpe (https://www.pprune.org/where-they-now/530381-group-captain-john-thorpe-rip.html) as one example. Others followed a similar path and quite a few made Air Rank. I feel that they added a valuable dimension to the QFI cadre.

YS

[Ken Scott]

My experience of creamies was rather different. Having breezed through flying training themselves they pretty much all seemed to have the attitude ‘it’s easy, I can do it so why can’t you?’

Couple that with their being the same age or younger than their students and often ‘only’ being Flying Officers many had some substantial chips on their shoulders.

I preferred a QFI who had struggled a bit through training and therefore could empathise with his student.

[Treble one]

Thanks for the replies chaps but no-one has actually answered the question……yet. Of course it was all different in ‘our day’ but what of now - is it still FJ until the system decides otherwise and how far into the training system do you have to go before multi or rotary becomes an option ?

Everyone is graded in Elementary Flying Training then streamed FJ/Multis/Rotary based on that grading and the need of the RAF?

[beamer]

As far as I recall, ‘creamies’ were streamed off after Valley and after completion of the CFS course could be sent to the JP BFTS Units or on rare occasions back to the Hawk. I always felt that, skilled as they might be, they had a bit of a credibility issue as they had no front-line experience to pass on to their students.

Did anyone else have an Instructor at BFTS which they simply did not get on with at all ?

[ShyTorque]

As far as I recall, ‘creamies’ were streamed off after Valley and after completion of the CFS course could be sent to the JP BFTS Units or on rare occasions back to the Hawk. I always felt that, skilled as they might be, they had a bit of a credibility issue as they had no front-line experience to pass on to their students.

Did anyone else have an Instructor at BFTS which they simply did not get on with at all ?

Oh yes indeed. In fact there was one individual that no-one got on with. After a few trips and in my view, negative progress because I couldn’t stand the bloke, I reluctantly asked for a quiet word with the flight commander. I explained how his instructional technique seemed to revolve around regular personal insults and minor physical assault across the cockpit and asked for an instructor change. He threw up his hands in despair and said “Well, someone’s got to fly with him!”. I obviously was by no means the first.

I’d like to think that having flown with this individual, I did go on to become a rather more understanding and empathetic instructor. Others might disagree but I never called any of my students “You little $¥it”, or thumped them on the upper arm.

[212man]

I’d like to think that having flown with this individual, I did go on to become a rather more understanding and empathetic instructor. Others might disagree but I never called any of my students “You little $¥it”, or thumped them on the upper arm.

I can empathise - my instructor used to thump my helmet! However, the primary driver to improve was a sense of not wanting to disappoint him, and that was what generated the real progress. We were best friends for years until his sad, premature, death. Well, given his lifestyle, some might say he had a good innings!

he was definitely not a creamie though - Halton apprentice, Cpl, Commissioned, Vulcans, C130s

[charliegolf]

Oh yes indeed. In fact there was one individual that no-one got on with. After a few trips and in my view, negative progress because I couldn’t stand the bloke, I reluctantly asked for a quiet word with the flight commander. I explained how his instructional technique seemed to revolve around regular personal insults and minor physical assault across the cockpit and asked for an instructor change. He threw up his hands in despair and said “Well, someone’s got to fly with him!”. I obviously was by no means the first.

I’d like to think that having flown with this individual, I did go on to become a rather more understanding and empathetic instructor. Others might disagree but I never called any of my students “You little $¥it”, or thumped them on the upper arm.

Looking back Shy, what do you feel the outcome of saying, "Touch me again and I'll break your arm." would have been?

CG

[ShyTorque]

Another student on my course later told him something like that….they very nearly came to fisticuffs in the cockpit. The student later became an RAF Regiment officer…. ‘nuff said.

[trim it out]

What did the leadership do about this instructor?

[212man]

What did the leadership do about this instructor?
Made him a Red Arrow….

[trim it out]

Made him a Red Arrow….
OK you got a laugh out of me for that one :E

[Nil_Drift]

"What did the leadership do about this instructor?"

I changed type in the early '90s. C130 student crews were constituted throughout the OCU. Our pilot QFI was a Scottish "poisonous dwarf" whose only method of communication was violent shouting and berating of both the students and his fellow instructional staff. As we were all miserable and underconfident trying to learn in a palpably angry environment we, collectively, didn't do well on our first crew check ride despite the student captain's and my previous flying experience.

We were all marched in one by one in front of OC 242 and were told we were going to be given one last chance and a reshuffle took place. The immediate change in professional ability and standards was seen by everyone, instructors and fellow students alike. EVERYONE knew who this character was and he was left to exert his unprofessional malevolence on a different crew with an outcome unknown to me.

Many years later when I was a sim instructor, and CRM [Crew Resource Management] was the dominant theme, aforementioned "pd" was in the box, I could see and hear how much effort he was putting in to being 'nice' and trying to utilise his crew as he should, but it wasn't his natural character and everyone was rightly suspicious of him. Again, the instructional environment was affected.

Age appeared to have mellowed him by the time he was on his last tour on a long distance fleet but he never really changed. As far as I could see, the leadership chose to ignore this character flaw over decades and the fact that he could fly was all that mattered, despite the evidence that the lack of CRM left crew morale low in what today would be called a Toxic Environment.

Perhaps this broad failure of leadership over the years to deal with such, when victims were blamed and suppressed, is why allegations of toxic management activity in higher levels of the RAF and high profile representatives finds its way into the Press?

[trim it out]

"What did the leadership do about this instructor?"

I changed type in the early '90s. C130 student crews were constituted throughout the OCU. Our pilot QFI was a Scottish "poisonous dwarf" whose only method of communication was violent shouting and berating of both the students and his fellow instructional staff. As we were all miserable and underconfident trying to learn in a palpably angry environment we, collectively, didn't do well on our first crew check ride despite the student captain's and my previous flying experience.

We were all marched in one by one in front of OC 242 and were told we were going to be given one last chance and a reshuffle took place. The immediate change in professional ability and standards was seen by everyone, instructors and fellow students alike. EVERYONE knew who this character was and he was left to exert his unprofessional malevolence on a different crew with an outcome unknown to me.

Many years later when I was a sim instructor, and CRM [Crew Resource Management] was the dominant theme, aforementioned "pd" was in the box, I could see and hear how much effort he was putting in to being 'nice' and trying to utilise his crew as he should, but it wasn't his natural character and everyone was rightly suspicious of him. Again, the instructional environment was affected.

Age appeared to have mellowed him by the time he was on his last tour on a long distance fleet but he never really changed. As far as I could see, the leadership chose to ignore this character flaw over decades and the fact that he could fly was all that mattered, despite the evidence that the lack of CRM left crew morale low in what today would be called a Toxic Environment.

Perhaps this broad failure of leadership over the years to deal with such, when victims were blamed and suppressed, is why allegations of toxic management activity in higher levels of the RAF and high profile representatives finds its way into the Press?
This has been my experience of these sort of people too. The military spins a good leadership dit, usually with a nice mnemonic to go with it but the hangar floor reality and the lived experience can be far different. The system is not designed in favour of calling it out either. People either just wait until the problem is posted out, or they themselves are posted.

[MPN11]

During my Flying Grading at BRNC, I had the misfortune to be assigned to "L Jnr", whose father ran the grading outfit at Roborough. L Jnr was a shouty, sweary individual who started the second you started to climb into his Tiger Moth ..."Get a bloody move on, we haven't got all day". Despite having a PPL, he drained my confidence to the point when I dreaded seeing his aircraft, with the 3 Dayglo stripes on the cowling, taxying in.

Anyway, I failed ... and left the RN. However, my father was sufficiently concerned about the processes that he took up the matter with our local MP, and eventually received an apology from Captain BRNC "for a hasty decision". And I did hear later that L Jnr was removed from his instructional post. So it could happen!

[PlasticCabDriver]

As far as I recall, ‘creamies’ were streamed off after Valley and after completion of the CFS course could be sent to the JP BFTS Units or on rare occasions back to the Hawk. I always felt that, skilled as they might be, they had a bit of a credibility issue as they had no front-line experience to pass on to their students.

Did anyone else have an Instructor at BFTS which they simply did not get on with at all ?

We had 3 creamies on our BFTS Sqn early 90’s. One was just a superb instructor and I looked forward to flying with him. The second was also a good instructor, but could be a bit impatient if it wasn’t going well. The third’s instructional technique just seemed to consist of screaming at the student from the back (Tucano) followed by brief pauses of quiet where he would apologise, “I just want you to do well!”, before launching off into another screaming fit. Fortunately I was spared #3, unlike many of my colleagues.

[Johnny Head in Air]

Quote:

“Thinking back to the creamies I encountered, almost without exception they went on greater things, either professionally or in career terms. I recall a young Fg Off John Thorpe as one example. Others followed a similar path and quite a few made Air Rank.”

Yes indeed, including one young thruster at Valley who became the Chief of Chiefs and a Peer of the Realm. My recollection of him as a creamie from 50 yrs distance is not exactly fond but then again AFT was not my finest hour.

[beamer]

Having spent some time at Lyneham, I cannot for the life of me remember a ‘Scottish poison dwarf’ on the OCU but then again I am getting very old !

[steve757]

George B?

[Ken Scott]

Having spent some time at Lyneham, I cannot for the life of me remember a ‘Scottish poison dwarf’ on the OCU but then again I am getting very old !

I can, I too had the misfortune to have him as my QFI for my initial OCU. His instructional technique did rely principally on shouting and violence, with an ample dose of boasting of his own exceptional brilliance. I loathed him and came close to quitting.

[ItsonlyMeagain]

I do. I was a crossover and on the OCU in 92. First initial - J.

First met at ELUAS where fellow studies loved winding him up leading to the “I’m I/C in charge here” rant.

Me

[Gordomac]

Not sure if the thread opening question has been answered and I might have caused a drift by asking about "cremiers" although you lot seem to refer to them as "Creamies". Really interesting responses though and glad to see balance offered in the creamies debate.

The term suggests that these were really super bods with advanced skills in order to be 'creamed'. Glad to see that it is not the case. Indeed, on the Civil path to professional status, sometimes, the only route is through professional instruction. With a PPL, one would next progress to Assistant Flying Instructor at some grass field. It started the path on my disliked phrase "Self Improver".

My point is that you would have Instructors with around 100hrs total themselves.

I note that RAF Creamies would have around 400.

Civil aviation is littered with the wrong types illustrated by many on this thread. I'll offer as observation with my infamous humour;

My Airline ,at one point, had no idea how to "Train" but relished in "Testing" and enjoyed "Chopping" and destroying. Most, so-called "Instructors" were ex-mill and I often wondered if they were "Creamies". However, I was acting LHS for new joiner who decided in a coffee break where other individuals from the Training Department were present to, er, brown-nose,a bit. He went on & on about how good the training was and how good the trainers were. I responded;

"Mate. 'Training'-? Have you noticed all 'Trainers ' in this company look exactly the same ? They all have hunched up shoulders and swept back foreheads. There is a reason. If you ask them a question, they hunch up their shoulders. When you tell them the answer, they smack their own foreheads.

Went a bit quiet and I had a very hard annual Line Check some months later.

[lsd]

Concur with this assessment of Ljnr. Aged 17 and awarded a RAF Flying Scholarship at Roborough I spent the Easter holiday striving for a PPL but the discouraging attitude and general mismanagement of the son and father meant the course was never finished in the four weeks, and I really couldn’t be bothered to return - not that I recall they made any effort to get me back. Be interesting to learn how many scholarships they were awarded and how many they successfully passed

[MPN11]

Concur with this assessment of Ljnr. Aged 17 and awarded a RAF Flying Scholarship at Roborough I spent the Easter holiday striving for a PPL but the discouraging attitude and general mismanagement of the son and father meant the course was never finished in the four weeks, and I really couldn’t be bothered to return - not that I recall they made any effort to get me back. Be interesting to learn how many scholarships they were awarded and how many they successfully passed
Hello, and glad I wasn't the only identified victim of that disagreeable pair!

The dreaded 3 Dayglo stripes on T8191!

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x722/t8191_5f6160ec0abfbef8e4e75ed27e1a1c941090c8c5.jpg

[pr00ne]

Everyone is graded in Elementary Flying Training then streamed FJ/Multis/Rotary based on that grading and the need of the RAF?

Surely it is FJ/Multi/Rotary/UAV now?

[76fan]

Hello, and glad I wasn't the only identified victim of that disagreeable pair!

The dreaded 3 Dayglo stripes on T8191!

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x722/t8191_5f6160ec0abfbef8e4e75ed27e1a1c941090c8c5.jpg
My first two flights in T8191 were on the 29th September 1964, the rest in BB694. The only problem with Roborough, as I recall, was the weather. I don't know how many hours we BRNC cadets were supposed to get but I totalled only 6hrs 35min over a period of seven weeks having gone solo after 4hrs 5min. By comparison my ATC Flying Scholarship of 30hrs, at Elstree in Chipmunks in the summer of '62, was fully completed in three weeks.

[MPN11]

My Log Book suggests that BB694 was L Snr’s aircraft, in which I did my No Progress tests!

[Flipster130]

George B?
NO - not him, the George B who I knew was an excellent instructor! He was the only one who could clearly explain the vagaries of the ADF needle and how my tracking could improve.... which he imparted with great aplomb over a beer and few fags - this nugget of info helped my academic flying no end and probably saved me a few years later, when doing a missed approach from Bardufoss (or somewhere similarly cold), which invloved tracking 2 NDBs up a steep sided-valley well-below SAlt in poor weather (without GPS in those days) and us watching the radalt out the corner of one eye with a lump in the throat.

However, there was another 'short scot' QFI around on the OCU - whom I feel lucky to have avoided flying with...so I can't comment directly - but certainly, his bad rep preceded him......Ken and Me (above) have the right idea as to identity. Glad to hear he may have mellowed.

As for Creamies - I flew with a few - both on the JP and in the Hawk. I cant think of a bad one. In fact, they were pretty good at the 'soft-side' of things, as they had been through the same mill/sausage-machine fairly recently and could relate to idiots like me having problems with High Technical Merit things at certain times. They were probably better than a lot of QWIs at the TWUs, (who had not been to CFS to learn how to impart knowledge) and who often reverted to the 'I can do it, why can't you?' ...or 'just fly better, man' approaches.

Once upon a time someone said

"There are no such things as a bad students, just bad instructors!"
or alternatively,
"You can teach monkeys to fly"
(of which I am an example)
F

[steve757]

The passage of time is a cruel mistress. I was on HTS in the late 80's early 90 and cannot get my brain to recall the HCS guys of the time.
C'est la vie....

[ShyTorque]

'I can do it, why can't you?' ...or 'just fly better, man' approaches

Problem was, it should have been: “I can do it, I’ve shown yer, why can’t you do it?”

I suffered one ex RAF instructor whilst qualifying for my CPL(A). I’d not flown a fixed wing for some years, but I was an ex RAF QFI and QHI myself, at that time fully current on rotary. I felt I needed to be given a few nuggets of help and left to get on with with it, at least to begin with, unless I was doing something blatantly wrong or dangerous. Instead, this instructor nagged constantly, even before takeoff, to the point that I could no longer concentrate. During one debrief I asked him to desist with the constant chat while I was flying, obviously unless he thought I was going to kill us, but he just couldn’t shut up. On a subsequent flight I eventually asked him to take control because I’d had enough. He got surprisingly aggressive, insisting I carried on flying. I landed, shut the aircraft down and told him that his methods of “instruction” might have been deemed acceptable thirty years ago at RAF BFTS, but not when I was paying at a civilian flying school, and walked away from him. I went to the chief instructor and told him that there was no way I was going to pay any more to fly with this chap, and I didn’t.

[212man]

Problem was, it should have been: “I can do it, I’ve shown yer, why can’t you do it?”

I suffered one ex RAF instructor whilst qualifying for my CPL(A). I’d not flown a fixed wing for some years, but I was an ex RAF QFI and QHI myself, at that time fully current on rotary. I felt I needed to be given a few nuggets of help and left to get on with with it, at least to begin with, unless I was doing something blatantly wrong or dangerous. Instead, this instructor nagged constantly, even before takeoff, to the point that I could no longer concentrate. During one debrief I asked him to desist with the constant chat while I was flying, obviously unless he thought I was going to kill us, but he just couldn’t shut up. On a subsequent flight I eventually asked him to take control because I’d had enough. He got surprisingly aggressive, insisting I carried on flying. I landed, shut the aircraft down and told him that his methods of “instruction” might have been deemed acceptable thirty years ago at RAF BFTS, but not when I was paying at a civilian flying school, and walked away from him. I went to the chief instructor and told him that there was no way I was going to pay any more to fly with this chap, and I didn’t.
I had a sort of opposite to that. In 1999 I went to Florida to build some hours to allow the relatively simple process, in those days, of gaining a CPL(A) based on having my ATPL(H) etc. I just needed few extra FW hours, including some Night P1, I recall. I had an instructor, for a night check flight, who was pleasant enough, but very talkative and keen to constantly pass on pearls of (pretty simple/obvious) wisdom, as we did the walkaround, start up and taxy to the holding point. As we waited for a gap to depart in, he asked "so how many hours have you got so far?" I said "oh, about six and a half thousand, with fifteen hundred night". He left me to my own devices thereafter.....

[Treble one]

Surely it is FJ/Multi/Rotary/UAV now?

Fair point-apologies.

[Ken Scott]

Actually I think people are recruited for pilot or UAV separately although no doubt there is some crossover (and I knew plenty of pilots who did tours on UAVs). The medical requirements are the same for both branches which I always thought was a bit perverse as why would anyone choose to sit in a box on the ground when they could actually fly unless they had a medical issue?

[Bob Viking]

Fair point-apologies.

I would have to double check but I don’t believe that to be the case. People join the RAF to be a UAS pilot. I don’t believe it is a streaming option. There could be different medical standards for instance.

It would need someone more current than me to confirm that though.

BV

[PPRuNeUser0211]

I would have to double check but I don’t believe that to be the case. People join the RAF to be a UAS pilot. I don’t believe it is a streaming option. There could be different medical standards for instance.

It would need someone more current than me to confirm that though.

BV
I don't believe it's a "standard" streaming option at present, but there have definitely been examples of needs-of-the-service UAS streaming from pilot training before.

[Toadstool]

I would have to double check but I don’t believe that to be the case. People join the RAF to be a UAS pilot. I don’t believe it is a streaming option. There could be different medical standards for instance.

It would need someone more current than me to confirm that though.

BV

I don’t think there are different medical standards because UAS pilots still have to do EFT.

[alfred_the_great]

Actually I think people are recruited for pilot or UAV separately although no doubt there is some crossover (and I knew plenty of pilots who did tours on UAVs). The medical requirements are the same for both branches which I always thought was a bit perverse as why would anyone choose to sit in a box on the ground when they could actually fly unless they had a medical issue?

because god forbid they don’t want to be a kick the tyres and light the fires pilot, but still want to deliver air power?

[beamer]

The passage of time is a cruel mistress. I was on HTS in the late 80's early 90 and cannot get my brain to recall the HCS guys of the time.
C'est la vie....

I’m in the same boat at the same time - cannot for the life of me think on an HCS Instructor that fits the bill - there were some great guys such as George Dunn and the legendary George Brown but a Scottish poison dwarf ?

[Treble one]

I would have to double check but I don’t believe that to be the case. People join the RAF to be a UAS pilot. I don’t believe it is a streaming option. There could be different medical standards for instance.

It would need someone more current than me to confirm that though.

BV

Thanks Bob-interesting.

[brakedwell]

I was very lucky to have a good instructor durng my Piston Provost course at Ternhill in the mid fifties. He had been on Spitfires during the war and he came from a family that owned a large farm near Wem, which was not far from Ternhill. He was also officer in charge of the station pig farm and often flew in his smelly wellies! On duel trips we regularly flew round the farm at low level, checking that the fences and hedges were OK and the cows were fine. I used to say we should have been living in Australia or Texas.

[ItsonlyMeagain]

Beamer/steve757

Big hint at post #63. Second initial K.

Of course, one of you could be he!

Me

[steve757]

Thanks IoMa, got it now, all descriptions accurate!!

[jayteeto]

Chaps, RPAS is indeed now a streaming option and is being removed as a stand alone profession.

[Nil_Drift]

Thanks IoMa, got it now, all descriptions accurate!!

I confirm that you have accurately identified the "pd" of my post.

[Brian 48nav]

Excuse a long long retired ex-Herc' Nav' poking his nose in, but I was horrified to read the suggestion that my much missed old mate George Brown could have been the Scottish poisoned dwarf. I'm probably the only poster here who flew with George when he was a co-pilot and I think he would have admitted he was not odds-on to move to the LHS, particularly given his reputation as a pisshead and for lateness. I can tell an amusing story of how close he came to missing his flight back to Blighty to marry the lovely Christine. Although I took my 8 year option in '73 GB and I remained good friends.

I attended his Memorial at Lyneham in 2004 and the number of folk there was an indicator of how popular he must have been. I think it is extremely unlikely that he would have been anything other than a good instructor/examiner.

[Nil_Drift]

Don't worry, Brian, nobody is dissing George. Flipster at #69 quickly stifled that suggestion.

I recall the story told of a crew walking out to get wheels in the morning and tripping over GB who was comatose outside the hotel not having quite made it back from his night out! That would endorse your comment on his reputation, but I always got on well with him.

Fascinating to recall how many pickled high-functioning alcoholics there were on the truckie fleet in the '90s, GB, CB, WF to mention a few. But, as far as I know, there was never an incident or accident as a result, not that I am condoning such behaviour.

[NRU74]

RAF GraduationsRAF Valley
Air Vice-Marshal Fin Monahan, Director of the Development, Concepts and Doctrine Centre, was the Reviewing Officer at No 4 Flying Training School, RAF Valley, on Dec 1 2023, when RAF flying badges were awarded to four officers of No 72 (Fighter) Squadron.

From today's Telegraph - not many new pilots anymore !

[Gordomac]

NRU74 : And where are they going now, from Valley ?

Not sure if the opening question has even been answered but I see the trend.

,Out of deep interest, if a schoolkid today looks out of the classroom and fancies becoming a RAF pilot, what is he facing ?
Age, Ed certs, Selection , Officer Training, Flying Training, options after wings (if any).

What if,like my generation, looking out of the window and wanting to be an Airline Pilot meant Army, Navy or RAF Short Service Commission with very clear requirements . Can he look at the RAF as an Avenue ?

I can probably answer the last myself. No more SSC. So the willing supply of wannabee RAF pilots dries up straight away.

Is it that with a dwindling military requirement, there is a dwindling requirement and no need for RAF pilots ?. Looks like a bigger question needs posting rather than the opener.

[DuncanDoenitz]

NRU74 : And where are they going now, from Valley ?

Don't know where they are going, but it sounds like the entire course can share a taxi.

[ve3id]

The whole "surely you want to fly jets" thing was widespread when I joined, but largely disappeared during Afghanistan, with (according to some EFT QFI friends) more folks wanting rotary than jet.

Same in the CAF air element (now RCAF again) When I was in boot camp (BOTC 7504 if anybody's checking) we had one cadet who openly said he wanted rotary, and a rather macho colleague stated 'I'd rather admit I ma*t*rb**ed than want to fly a helicopter'.

Years later, I was in a museum in Atlantic Canada and a display had the log book of the helicopter wannabee, open to the page where he rescued 44 men from a burning oil rig, 2 at a time.

So much for 'macho'!

[beamer]

‘Developments, Concepts and Doctrine Centre’ ? I think we used to call it basket weaving…….

[downsizer]

‘Developments, Concepts and Doctrine Centre’ ? I think we used to call it basket weaving…….

He's a really nice guy guy though, very charismatic.

[Herod]

"charismatic"? Do keep up. The word of the year is apparently "rizz".. "He's got lots of rizz" is what the younger generation would understand

[ShyTorque]

"charismatic"? Do keep up. The word of the year is apparently "rizz".. "He's got lots of rizz" is what the younger generation would understand

I very recently saw the rather delectable Susie Dent on TV discussing the word. I think she’s got a fair amount of it herself. :E

P.s. making some bread this morning. Must go and check if the the dough has rizz….